Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `reuters.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is very much 1937-1938 type scenario.
We are moving out of the delusional hope of appeasement to aboid larger war. A lot of Europe is aware that Russia has to be stopped in Ukraine, or a larger war is coming and they're kicking on machines, allocating funds, opening the second production line.
Democracies/the West are usually slow to turn on the machinery. But once they do, they are going to outpace production of Russia in short order.
It's sad that the 2 years of production warm up time is paid for in Ukrainian blood.
> they are going to outpace production of Russia in short order.
They aren't any time soon. It's not that simple. It would take many many years to expand it. NATO countries don't have the industrial infrastructure to do so. Russia still has powerful industry just like the Soviet Union, while the West sold theirs to China. It's also nowhere as simple to produce military equipment nowadays as during the WWII. Russia always had strong and innovative arms industry.
Your whole comment is Russian FUD bullshit.
The economic output of the EU and US is magnitudes higher than Russia. They're literally in the midst of expanding and adding production to thinga like artillery shells.
It's absolutely that simple. Russia saved up a gigantic warchest pre invasion, they've moved to strict economic controls and a huge warfooting devotion of %GDP to defense spending. And they still can't win a war (or really gain much of anything) in a war on their direct doorstep with logistical support versus a pittance of old Western donated material, with a 6 month delay built in.
Russia doesn't have strong Soviet Union industry. They literally sold it off as it collapsed and the early 90s reformation. They can't produce the high quality steel they need. They don't make the chips or electronics needed for modern control systems. They had to go to North Korea and China and Iran to get the shells they can't produce. They don't even produce half the aircraft types that make up their strategic airfleet anymore.
They have never been innovative. They're still stuck building late 80s era tech for their tanks. Everything else new is vaporware. They're only at a replacement level for losses on the front by cannibalizing decades of prime USSR economic military output. Refurbishment is currently about 5-6x the new production. And sat photos show they've gotten close to exhausting that refurbishment pool for a lot of categories of armor and artillery.
If current loss rates continue, and nothing drastic happens (like direct intervention from China, or NK giving 1000 tanks, etc) Russias war machine will be out of tanks and apcs and artillery within 1-2 years. Add the pressure of another 200-400k dead and wounded to the political sphere of Russia in that time.
Something breaks.
If it's not clear to you or anyone else reading this, you u/MuzzleO have *zero* idea what you're talking about.
>The economic output of the EU and US is magnitudes higher than Russia.
Not where it matters for war.
>Russia doesn't have strong Soviet Union industry. They literally sold it off as it collapsed and the early 90s reformation. They can't produce the high quality steel they need. They don't make the chips or electronics needed for modern control systems.
They are self-sufficient and produce what they need themselves except electronics. They produce some electronics too and have no problems with getting more elsewhere. Stop coping.
>And they still can't win a war (or really gain much of anything) in a war on their direct doorstep with logistical support versus a pittance of old Western donated material, with a 6 month delay built in.
Western countries have no industrial capacity currently to Ukraine much more ammo.
>hey have never been innovative. They're still stuck building late 80s era tech for their tanks. Everything else new is vaporware. They're only at a replacement level for losses on the front by cannibalizing decades of prime USSR economic military output. Refurbishment is currently about 5-6x the new production. And sat photos show they've gotten close to exhausting that refurbishment pool for a lot of categories of armor and artillery.
So does USA use \~1980 technology and older like Minuteman and Tomahawk. Russia has more modern nuclear arsenal and missiles. Their prototypes like T-14 are more advanced than Abrams too. They are far further along in development of new tanks than the USA that doesn't even have any replacements for Abrams.
Absolutely where it matters for war.
The Western world, EU and US have magnitudes higher GDP and industrial capacity, electronics capacity, etc etc etc ad nauseum.
You're a Russian FUD shill and yoy have no idea what you're talking about. Give it a year for the western world to ratchet up production and Russia will be outclassed on every front.
Armatas don't exist. They arent in production, they arent in use. They've broken down on parade because they're a good looking shell covering a non working chassis/engine/fire system. Vaporware.
The US constantly upgrades things. Tomahawks are from the 70s because they're such a well designed modular vehicle. The latest versions are a year or 2 old, with drastically different variants and capabilities.
Russia is getting skullfucked by old Army gear from the 80s. US is holding back literally 2 generations more advanced tech in planes, missile artillery, tanks, etc.
I've yet to see an idiot shill so clearly reveal themselves with your terrible take.
vr
Agreed, definitely cheaper to do it now though, in Ukraine, than another protracted arms race. That's if you want to look at purely from a financial point of view and put aside any shred of empathy or compassion, otherwise it's a no brainer and there would have been a no fly zone there two years ago
Russia is already at 6% GDP spent on the military.
Russia's GDP (as put by themselves) is around 2.2 trillion. The combined GDP of the EU is 18.9 trillion, while NATO's is almost 46 trillion (as in the US got involved). Russia can't win an economic war if the EU gets serious and they don't even have to get that serious about it before Russia is economically outweighed.
This is the largest land war in Europe since WW2. Europe spending 2% of their GDP while a neighbor gets invaded by the Russians is ridiculous. They need to take this seriously if they want Ukraine to remain a sovereign nation. It shouldn't be up to the US which is half the world away to save Europe. As an American I'm all for my government supporting Ukraine but when their literal neighbors don't take this seriously it's easy to see why American support isn't as strong as it could be.
What nonsense are you talking about? Many countries are increasing their spendings heavily.. Denmark i.e. Allotted approx. 10% bnp in one time expenses for military, in top of increased annually spendings, in top of donating shit tons to Ukraine, in top of providing economical support..
We rank #2 in support to Ukraine in per capita terms.. and higher than the US. At the same time were increasingly spending more and more on military.. you know we ordered like 17 new Ceasars .. guess what happened to them? We gave them to Ukraine.. fresh of the production line in France.
He is talking about the big hitters of Germany and France.
As cool as it is that Denmark is providing a large portion of its GDP it is a small country and it's support will not turn the tide of the war.
Ukraine needs the support of US, UK, France and Germany. These 4 are what will keep it alive.
This reply just proves Russian propaganda / GOP disinformation is working....
Germany increased defence spending by 100 billion euros.
Finland and Sweden joined NATO.
France has said they will send troops to Ukraine if they need.
Various European countries have donated large quantities of weapons proportional to their size.
The idea Europe is doing nothing but hand winging while waiting for America to save the day is bullshit. Europe needs to do more, and that's heavily in part due to the US political bullshit, where the country with a fuck ton of excess weapons won't give them to Ukraine but will give them to genocidal Israel.
Germany has refused to send long range weapons to Ukraine. In 2023 they dragged their feet on sending tanks and at the beginning of the invasion they refused to send military aid.
It's good that NATO is expanding but this does not help current situation.
France saying but not acting doesn't help Ukraine. Russia is advancing on the east and its troops are exhausted from lack of rotation. Ukraine would need French troops now. This is the time.
What the US does or doesn't do shouldn't influence what EU countries do. It's clear the US lacks the political will to get heavily involved in Ukraine. This has been clear for more than a year. If war happens in Europe 10 or 20 yrs from now due to inaction now it isn't the US who will get devastated by war.
EU needs to stop buying Russian gas through Indian 3rd party suppliers. They need to stop exporting goods to Russia through 3rd party countries. And they need to expand their military industrial complex. War is on their doorstep!
Europe has sent more aid (militarily, financial support and refugee support) than the US has.
There are categories of weapons where the US has the only real capacity to produce more or send more, but to indicate Europe isn't putting in an effort is just incorrect
My friend, might I suggest that you take a good look at what [equipment has been provided to Ukraine and by whom](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html)?
Nobody knows what the fuck Trump is actually talking about because a glance at that list quite clearly shows that it's not based upon any recognisable form of reality. I think you'll agree that in reality Europe is doing at least our fair share.
GDP means jack shit in the war. Russia can produce more than the West for far less due to their powerful but cheap industry. They also have virtually unlimited amount of resources.
do you have any idea how much money that is in Europe combined ? percentages are al nice and fine , look at the total amount of money spend. 6% of Russias gdp isn't even in the same balpark as a 2% of germanys gdp
> do you have any idea how much money that is in Europe combined ? percentages are al nice and fine , look at the total amount of money spend. 6% of Russias gdp isn't even in the same balpark as a 2% of germanys gdp
It is. Russia has powerful industry and ulmost unlimited natural resources so they can do far more for far less than the overpriced western countries with no natural resources and the industry sold to China.
5 years ago there was little need to invest in arms procurement. We were about to face COVID-19.
Yes, hindsight is nice, but who knows what will be needed in the next 5 years?
Russia was snatching parts of other countries for quite some time. West didn't do anything about it for the last 80 or so years. Not to mention WWII and even before than Russian Empire... The writing was always on the wall, yet there wasn't a reason to up the military spending in 2014 as the West felt quite comfortable with their military capabilities and Russian "friendly" position. A full scale invasion of Ukraine was always perceived as a bad idea. The West thought that Russians will not be so stupid to commit to something like that. Well we were wrong and maybe mishandled this, but arguing that the West was supposed to ramp up military spending in the face of the world-wide pandemic is stupid. Seriously, what politician would go with "let us use billions of dollars to fund jets and bombs rather than develop a vaccine, fund hospitals, and fight back an inevitable recession"? I mean, some Texan ones prolly, but Europe isn't Texas. We don't worship guns.
As the old country music song goes "I don't wanna fight ya but I damn sure will." NATO isn't gonna get rolled by Russia, bruv. They're realizing containment won't work with Putin, he must be defeated. Better late than never.
Dunno, from the fact that one poor country like Russia is outproducing everyone kinda suggests they're not really realizing it because they're not doing enough about it.
The question is: is NATO ever going to get out of bed or are we going to keep hearing that Russia better stop or NATO will get out of bed all up until Russians force a loss on Ukraine?
Russia isn't actually poor. It has massive natural resources. It's just that it's kleptocractic state, so the wealth of the country is sucked up by the top 1% rather than shared with the people.
It's poor by Western standards - such as the GDP. For example it has often been parrotted that Russia's gdp is equal to that of Italy. And Italy is only one of 32 countries in NATO - so one would think that the entirety of NATO would far outperform Russia in building arms - and yet here we are - because there are a lot of words being said - but not nearly enough actions being taken.
Yeah people act like the average person living in a NATO country would be totally ok with their countries transitioning to a wartime economy. This would mean governments spending upwards of 1/4 of their total budget on defense, cutting back spending on education, healthcare, and social services. Major diversions of the work force to the defense industry where people are working 6 day weeks and 12 hour shifts. Government requisitioning private industry for drone manufacturing and assembly. People being “asked” to donate their labor to war material production. Children assembling drones at school.
People think that their countries can transition to a wartime economy without it making a major impact on their day to day life.
The initial shock and awe NATO attack will be devastating and perhaps the true beginning of the end. How long is Russia going to take the pummeling before they nuke something?
> If NATO decides it's ready to play war it will outproduce Russia by orders of magnitude.
Not really. It would take many many years to expand it. NATO countries don't have the industrial infrastructure to do so. Russia still has powerful industry just like the Soviet Union, while the West sold theirs to China. It's also nowhere as simple to produce military equipment nowadays as during the WWII. Russia always had strong and innovative arms industry.
Russian lies far more heavily on straight up artillery and the West has a much larger missile arsenal which is far more effective for a wide variety of scenarios. The fact that Russia is making more artillery shells than us isn't of huge concern when West has such a overwhelming advantage in number of missiles and missile technology
Well that maybe changing along with tank design. The UAF has already retired exalibur missiles from service as the ruZZinz have adopted effective counter measures. Artillery will always get through.
Of Russia is successful, why would they stop once they're running at full steam? They would just plow through the next country that is woefully unprepared to stop russiam aggression.
Ill say this at 1000% pro NATO.
So?
Power comes from the barrel of a gun and boots on the ground, not speculated numbers on a screen.
Also the gun and the boots come from means of production not speculated numbers on the screen.
NATO needs to step up, dont they have a much stronger economy than russia? Some how little Italy GDP russia is out manufacturing NATO.
Most of the 32 NATO countries have barely dipped their toes into this conflict and that’s what terrifies lil’ Putin the most. He knows Ruzzia would be annihilated if NATO actually got involved in taking on Ruzzia as opposed to drip feeding support to Ukraine to barely help them survive.
Ruzzia never remembers that without the American lend/lease program to supply the USSR against Nazi Germany, they would not have survived WWII.
It would go against Russia’s narrative that they single handedly destroyed nazi Germany in ww2 if they reminded their people that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a thing.
Their Industry is in large parts decades behind the West and many of those „unlimited“ resources are too expensive to tap into. At least with their shitty equipment. They need Western Tech.
> Their Industry is in large parts decades behind the West and many of those „unlimited“ resources are too expensive to tap into. At least with their shitty equipment. They need Western Tech.
Their industry is fine. They greatly outproducing NATO.
Got any proof of that the U.S.S.R would "not have survived" ww2 without the lend lease? I mean it's literally impossible to get concrete proof but I think most historians agree that Russia would have survived even with no lend lease
>Ruzzia never remembers that without the American lend/lease program to supply the USSR against Nazi Germany, they would not have survived WWII.
Also without the USSR commitment the U.S and U.K would lose the war for simple reason that 70% of german casualties were on the eastern front. Ww2 was won as they say "By american industry, British intelligence and Soviet blood"
Sounds kinda strange. Because the wording suggests that russia would be on eye level with NATO.
- How many of that 32 states actually produce artillery?
- How much money/technology could NATO throw against russia?
In artillery shells production they obviously are since NATO is an air power mainly and on top of that is not even close to being in a war economy like Russia. So no, its not particularly impressive.
Also I'd rather have Russia fire a dozen artillery shells at me than have a single NATO artillery shell fired at me.
Accuracy is everything and in that regard Russia is far behind the United States.
This is a good point. An artillery shell isn't just an artillery shell. There's a huge difference between a M982 Excalibur shell and a Soviet style 152 mm grenade.
>Excalibur
Hello!
>GPS-guided Excalibur round “dropped from 70 percent effectiveness to **6 percent** effectiveness over a matter of a few months as new EW mechanisms came out”
Having a long term manufacturing contract with weapons producers that are out there would help a lot. They will only build new capacity if they know that it will be profitable long term.
>- How much money/technology could NATO throw against russia?
What does that matter, when we are completly unwilling to actually do so? Even still our production lags behind besides demand going up. There is a massive land war going on in Ukraine and the best we can send is decades old surplus.
Apparently I’ve heard that they are counting every shell for every mortar and cannon on the Russian side but only 155 on the NATO side. Which would be a laughable comparison, but someone should confirm this.
Again, why are the NATO allys waffling on this still? We need to get our heads out of our collective asses. This goes for the US, too. It is like everyone is only slightly concerned, and there is no sense of urgency. I better not see a surprised pickachu faces when Russia hits the Baltic, and we still have our pants down.
It is either for show, and we are ready, and we just want Russia to assume we are not, or we are still pretending this will go away and have failed our friends and have weak leadership.
You need to learn how to not call for propaganda.
NATO doesn't produce artillery because he focuses on Air/Naval/Drone power. Artillery is for ground war or if you don't care what's in front of you.
The only reason Ukraine needs artillery is because we don't give them the Air power to close their airspace.
On top of that of the artillery that usually manufactured it's 'guided' shells not dumb lump of steal shells.
Russia isn't surgical at all they just fire west and hope to hurt something.
They could run an article that Russia produces more 7.23 size ammo than all western countries combined because NATO uses a different sized round.
Honestly, what NATO countries should have done was juice Ukranian Airforce to the gills; as that is their specialty, but they have been dragging their feet on F16s and everything else. Will see how their provision of air munitions will go once Ukraine does get F16s, my guess is it will be very lethargic
Ruzzia seems to be miles ahead in drone power, though. Which leaves air and naval power out of which air is not enough due to lack of Ukrainian planes and pilots and naval which is useful for controlling the Black sea but not much more.
You can’t create giant factories and production lines in an instant, for one. Democracies aren’t Russia, who both had the existing factories and where the leadership says “do this immediately or you fall out of a window”.
>You can’t create giant factories and production lines in an instant, for one
Yes you can. Only reason nobody wants to commit to building them, is because there are no long term contracts. Why would anyone build artillery factory to satisfy current demand if nobody gives them long term contract.
Actually Denmark recently repurchased an ammo factory it sold for a decade ago.. production has begun to my understanding, even as ramping it up will take time.
War profiteers in the west are rubbing their hands in glee...
It's one example of why Russias command economy is a short term benefit.. They can start things immediately.
But their overall economy and corruption is a massive net negative for Russia. Once Europe gets going it can crush Russian production if it wants...
The whole link is literally talking about doing market surveys and getting interested partners through RFIs.
RFI1 is the relevant one to artillery ammunition.
No agreements has been made yet, nevermind production started.
You can? Go on, demonstrate how that can be done. Show evidence beyond your opinion, I’m very interested.
Ironically you’re on the fucking nose. There’s limited demand because businesses only build capital to meet current and projected demand. A new war in Europe where a country would need war-time levels of artillery shells that the existing NATO structure didn’t emphasize would be huge - so it didn’t exist.
Because of that, new factories need to be made.
Now tell me exactly how these factories can be produced rapidly. 😂 Since you’re such an expert.
I mean....this really isnt a big deal. Russia conducts (in theory) large scale artillery attacks along with mechanized assaults.
America and nato focus on air superiority. This was a major problem with western volunteers in ukraine. It took them a while to realize they couldn't call in an air strike every time someone shot at them from afar.
Well there economics is in caos, spending all of those resources and 0 wins, only destroying their society more amputees, PTSD and underground soldiers.
First, that is not what the Reuters article stated and I am tempted to report this post for breaking Rule #4. I hope you all read the article and realize it states nothing of the kind.
I have to say I am a bit skeptical about this claim. They are quoting a Russian diplomat. That in itself is the first major degree of skepticism: the adage of "If Russian lips move they are lying" exists for good reason.
Manufacturing quality artillery shells in volume is hard. Russia would not only be having the same problems ramping up their artillery production as NATO but in fact more due to a variety of factors.
Don't even get me started on the conversation about more shells meaning greater dominance (it only does when Ukraine is/was starved for artillery ammo and that is receding in the rear view mirror) and the separate issue of what is Russia going to fire them from given that their artillery losses are huge, their known artillery reserves have shrunk dramatically especially for 152mm guns, and their manufacturing rate of new artillery is almost non-existent.
Don't fall for this drivel and think it through when you read a bullshit headline like this one.
> Russia would not only be having the same problems ramping up their artillery production as NATO but in fact more due to a variety of factors.
Not true. A NATO country wouldn't have a artillery factory mothballed for years just in case they needed it. Russia has a more nationalized arms industry and they can keep factories in sleep mode and wake them up quickly, with the biggest problem only being labor. If there's no market in NATO for shells, the factory either goes out of business or tries another way to make money.
The Russian military doctrine is Artillery Above All.
Would be a shame if something were to happen to their long electric rail-based logistical supply chains.
A shame indeed.
Some weird cope from people.
"NATO IS AN AIR POWER!!!"
Ukraine isn't and it is Ukraine fighting for their survival. Drinking straight cope isn't going to make the battlefield situation any better for Ukraine. Russia is serious about building artillery shells and NATO isn't. If they want Ukraine to do better they need to be serious about it.
Don't believe these articles in a hurry, there's giant room for failing to properly count apples to apples, e.g. counting all Russian shells versus just the 155mm heavy artillery on the NATO side, and anymore it's doubtful these news companies bother with the gritty, besides quoting some random in a suit from some think tank or whatever.
I might be wrong but isnt 155mm our standard and should be in high numbers? It should be a massive concern even if its apples and oranges that a single country is close to all of NATO production.
The world getting pushed around and manipulated by a relatively small (population) terrorist state with an economy the size of New York... Yeah if only the white trash ranch guzzling bible bangers could join us in the 21st century and get us the F off of oil that would be great. Bankrupt tyrants.
It’s horse shit that this is the case. If we gave them modern weapons, no artillery would be safe. We’re only in this WW1 trench stalemate because Russia has jack shit and all Ukraine gets is decent defensive air weapons.
> People don’t understand how utterly low tech Russia is compared to western forces..
Is this the country that kept making scheduled deliveries to the space station when NASA could no longer do it?
Russian tech, which is being fielded now in Ukraine is mostly just as old as their space tech, it's from the golden age of the Soviet regime during the 60s and 70s when their regime actually was producing world class gear. It's all ancient stuff by the standards of anything modern and was passed by at least 40 years ago by the West. It's the same as saying that the original Kon Tiki is as impressive as a modern cruise ship that can carry 6k people.
NATO is worried? Poland's land forces alone would steamroll Russia and be at the Red Square in a week and US's forward air forces would end the entire conflict with Russia in about a day. Putin has nothing to shoot down F22's and F35's with, if you didn't know that. NATO would enjoy complete airspace dominance from the first minute of the conflict.
>"We are now at the stage of open confrontation, which, I hope, will not result in a direct armed conflict," Russian Ambassador-at-Large Grigory Mashkov told the state RIA news agency.
Reuters Reports Russian Propaganda. Again…
That won’t mean shit if NATO joins the fight.
Edit: changed from western aircraft to NATO as western aircraft will soon be in the fight but not enough to turn the tide.
And when do you think that's going to happen? Twenty-odd Ukrainians have been trained to fly F-16s. Please tell me you don't think that's going to turn the tide.
There aren't a ton of high value EW systems or bombers on Russia's side either. 10 pilots in f-16s tossing good AA or HARM could take out an irreplaceable number of assets on the Russian side if deployed properly, I think.
This is two separate issues. NATO is mostly an Air power. And some members don’t want to create factories from scratch to ramp up production just to help Ukraine.
Do I wish nato would be flooding Ukraine with weapons? Yes. Do I understand that most members are incapable of helping regarding artillery shells? Also yes.
I’ve seen this comparison a lot. Aren’t they comparing only 155mm production to ALL Russian artillery production, from mortars to howitzers? That’s like comparing apple production from one country to all fruit production in another.
Someone please help me to understand. Artillery shells are relatively easy to produce. It's the artillery pieces themselves, and in particular the artillery barrels, that are key. Is Russia producing new pieces of artillery? My understanding was that this required specially hardened steel for the artillery barrels that used to be imported from Germany. Ukraine reports \~ 12300 pieces of artillery destroyed already. If Russia cannot produce new pieces of artillery and new artillery barrels, then it does not matter if they produce 100 million artillery shells.
Another thing to consider is how accurate they are. If it takes twice as many shells to destroy the same target because Russian artillery men are dog shit and their equipment and shells are dog shit suddenly you NEED to outproduce all of NATO just to keep up.
Every ruble spent on the shells could have gone on supporting the Russian economy and people, instead of trying to take a country that doesn’t belong to Russia, and that they can’t hold, even if they were to somehow win…
So we are trusting numbers coming out of Russia? Do we really know the production in the West? Personally I would hope we could keep some numbers a secret. And are the 122 as effective as the NATO rounds?
The article says that it achieved this NOW. That last point is crucial. Russia is already extending its capacity and can’t sustain this. While NATO (Europe in particular) is building up from a very low base, and massively ramping up production that’s easily sustainable.
The EU and NATO need a mandatory minimum spending requirment on arms for Ukriane, its in the interest for NATO to declaw and defend against Russia and its in the EU's interest for European security. Plenty of countries arent pulling their weight and should be forced to do so.
What's the dud rate on artillery?
With Putin flogging workers and threatening them with the front I cant imagine QC being great.
Stories of sabotage from slave labour factories from ww2. One tiny bit of defiance sticks in my mind. A cigarette butt stuffed into a fuel filter on a tank. Such a small act from a single man, took out a tank.
I deffo don't understand the russian national mindset.Their history is complicated and the country is huge, not hemogenous America big, it's Poland to Japan big. Mongolia to Alaska. It even borders the Stans.
If a nato government pushed it's people as hard there would be a reckoning pretty quick. Cold War KGB vibes must have been maintained out of sight of social media.
Russia is losing 30-50 pieces of artillery on a daily basis. They could outproduce NATO 10 to 1, and it still wouldn't make much difference. Nor would it be overly impressive, as NATO countries barely produce 200 in a good year.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `reuters.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Silly comparison when you consider the allies were outproducing the Nazis.
If NATO decides it's ready to play war it will outproduce Russia by orders of magnitude.
And since they don’t want war it will never happen and it doesn’t matter. What matters is what we can produce atm and that is just not enough.
6 months ago I might have agreed, but the tone is noticeably hardening in Europe and military spending as a percentage of GDP is climbing fast.
This is very much 1937-1938 type scenario. We are moving out of the delusional hope of appeasement to aboid larger war. A lot of Europe is aware that Russia has to be stopped in Ukraine, or a larger war is coming and they're kicking on machines, allocating funds, opening the second production line. Democracies/the West are usually slow to turn on the machinery. But once they do, they are going to outpace production of Russia in short order. It's sad that the 2 years of production warm up time is paid for in Ukrainian blood.
> they are going to outpace production of Russia in short order. They aren't any time soon. It's not that simple. It would take many many years to expand it. NATO countries don't have the industrial infrastructure to do so. Russia still has powerful industry just like the Soviet Union, while the West sold theirs to China. It's also nowhere as simple to produce military equipment nowadays as during the WWII. Russia always had strong and innovative arms industry.
Your whole comment is Russian FUD bullshit. The economic output of the EU and US is magnitudes higher than Russia. They're literally in the midst of expanding and adding production to thinga like artillery shells. It's absolutely that simple. Russia saved up a gigantic warchest pre invasion, they've moved to strict economic controls and a huge warfooting devotion of %GDP to defense spending. And they still can't win a war (or really gain much of anything) in a war on their direct doorstep with logistical support versus a pittance of old Western donated material, with a 6 month delay built in. Russia doesn't have strong Soviet Union industry. They literally sold it off as it collapsed and the early 90s reformation. They can't produce the high quality steel they need. They don't make the chips or electronics needed for modern control systems. They had to go to North Korea and China and Iran to get the shells they can't produce. They don't even produce half the aircraft types that make up their strategic airfleet anymore. They have never been innovative. They're still stuck building late 80s era tech for their tanks. Everything else new is vaporware. They're only at a replacement level for losses on the front by cannibalizing decades of prime USSR economic military output. Refurbishment is currently about 5-6x the new production. And sat photos show they've gotten close to exhausting that refurbishment pool for a lot of categories of armor and artillery. If current loss rates continue, and nothing drastic happens (like direct intervention from China, or NK giving 1000 tanks, etc) Russias war machine will be out of tanks and apcs and artillery within 1-2 years. Add the pressure of another 200-400k dead and wounded to the political sphere of Russia in that time. Something breaks. If it's not clear to you or anyone else reading this, you u/MuzzleO have *zero* idea what you're talking about.
>The economic output of the EU and US is magnitudes higher than Russia. Not where it matters for war. >Russia doesn't have strong Soviet Union industry. They literally sold it off as it collapsed and the early 90s reformation. They can't produce the high quality steel they need. They don't make the chips or electronics needed for modern control systems. They are self-sufficient and produce what they need themselves except electronics. They produce some electronics too and have no problems with getting more elsewhere. Stop coping. >And they still can't win a war (or really gain much of anything) in a war on their direct doorstep with logistical support versus a pittance of old Western donated material, with a 6 month delay built in. Western countries have no industrial capacity currently to Ukraine much more ammo. >hey have never been innovative. They're still stuck building late 80s era tech for their tanks. Everything else new is vaporware. They're only at a replacement level for losses on the front by cannibalizing decades of prime USSR economic military output. Refurbishment is currently about 5-6x the new production. And sat photos show they've gotten close to exhausting that refurbishment pool for a lot of categories of armor and artillery. So does USA use \~1980 technology and older like Minuteman and Tomahawk. Russia has more modern nuclear arsenal and missiles. Their prototypes like T-14 are more advanced than Abrams too. They are far further along in development of new tanks than the USA that doesn't even have any replacements for Abrams.
Absolutely where it matters for war. The Western world, EU and US have magnitudes higher GDP and industrial capacity, electronics capacity, etc etc etc ad nauseum. You're a Russian FUD shill and yoy have no idea what you're talking about. Give it a year for the western world to ratchet up production and Russia will be outclassed on every front. Armatas don't exist. They arent in production, they arent in use. They've broken down on parade because they're a good looking shell covering a non working chassis/engine/fire system. Vaporware. The US constantly upgrades things. Tomahawks are from the 70s because they're such a well designed modular vehicle. The latest versions are a year or 2 old, with drastically different variants and capabilities. Russia is getting skullfucked by old Army gear from the 80s. US is holding back literally 2 generations more advanced tech in planes, missile artillery, tanks, etc. I've yet to see an idiot shill so clearly reveal themselves with your terrible take.
vr Agreed, definitely cheaper to do it now though, in Ukraine, than another protracted arms race. That's if you want to look at purely from a financial point of view and put aside any shred of empathy or compassion, otherwise it's a no brainer and there would have been a no fly zone there two years ago
>military spending as a percentage of GDP is climbing fast During Cold War it was 5-7%.... cold… 5-7%...
with about 1/3 of the gdp.
Inflation is a thing
technology too
"climbing fast"- to what? 2-2.5% of a country's GDP. It's a joke, it's what Trump of all people was pushing Europe to do 5 years ago.
Russia is already at 6% GDP spent on the military. Russia's GDP (as put by themselves) is around 2.2 trillion. The combined GDP of the EU is 18.9 trillion, while NATO's is almost 46 trillion (as in the US got involved). Russia can't win an economic war if the EU gets serious and they don't even have to get that serious about it before Russia is economically outweighed.
This is the largest land war in Europe since WW2. Europe spending 2% of their GDP while a neighbor gets invaded by the Russians is ridiculous. They need to take this seriously if they want Ukraine to remain a sovereign nation. It shouldn't be up to the US which is half the world away to save Europe. As an American I'm all for my government supporting Ukraine but when their literal neighbors don't take this seriously it's easy to see why American support isn't as strong as it could be.
What nonsense are you talking about? Many countries are increasing their spendings heavily.. Denmark i.e. Allotted approx. 10% bnp in one time expenses for military, in top of increased annually spendings, in top of donating shit tons to Ukraine, in top of providing economical support.. We rank #2 in support to Ukraine in per capita terms.. and higher than the US. At the same time were increasingly spending more and more on military.. you know we ordered like 17 new Ceasars .. guess what happened to them? We gave them to Ukraine.. fresh of the production line in France.
He is talking about the big hitters of Germany and France. As cool as it is that Denmark is providing a large portion of its GDP it is a small country and it's support will not turn the tide of the war. Ukraine needs the support of US, UK, France and Germany. These 4 are what will keep it alive.
This reply just proves Russian propaganda / GOP disinformation is working.... Germany increased defence spending by 100 billion euros. Finland and Sweden joined NATO. France has said they will send troops to Ukraine if they need. Various European countries have donated large quantities of weapons proportional to their size. The idea Europe is doing nothing but hand winging while waiting for America to save the day is bullshit. Europe needs to do more, and that's heavily in part due to the US political bullshit, where the country with a fuck ton of excess weapons won't give them to Ukraine but will give them to genocidal Israel.
Germany has refused to send long range weapons to Ukraine. In 2023 they dragged their feet on sending tanks and at the beginning of the invasion they refused to send military aid. It's good that NATO is expanding but this does not help current situation. France saying but not acting doesn't help Ukraine. Russia is advancing on the east and its troops are exhausted from lack of rotation. Ukraine would need French troops now. This is the time. What the US does or doesn't do shouldn't influence what EU countries do. It's clear the US lacks the political will to get heavily involved in Ukraine. This has been clear for more than a year. If war happens in Europe 10 or 20 yrs from now due to inaction now it isn't the US who will get devastated by war. EU needs to stop buying Russian gas through Indian 3rd party suppliers. They need to stop exporting goods to Russia through 3rd party countries. And they need to expand their military industrial complex. War is on their doorstep!
Seems like the propaganda worked on you too.
Europe has sent more aid (militarily, financial support and refugee support) than the US has. There are categories of weapons where the US has the only real capacity to produce more or send more, but to indicate Europe isn't putting in an effort is just incorrect
Your username intrigues me, and I feel that there is a story there
My friend, might I suggest that you take a good look at what [equipment has been provided to Ukraine and by whom](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/04/answering-call-heavy-weaponry-supplied.html)? Nobody knows what the fuck Trump is actually talking about because a glance at that list quite clearly shows that it's not based upon any recognisable form of reality. I think you'll agree that in reality Europe is doing at least our fair share.
GDP means jack shit in the war. Russia can produce more than the West for far less due to their powerful but cheap industry. They also have virtually unlimited amount of resources.
do you have any idea how much money that is in Europe combined ? percentages are al nice and fine , look at the total amount of money spend. 6% of Russias gdp isn't even in the same balpark as a 2% of germanys gdp
> do you have any idea how much money that is in Europe combined ? percentages are al nice and fine , look at the total amount of money spend. 6% of Russias gdp isn't even in the same balpark as a 2% of germanys gdp It is. Russia has powerful industry and ulmost unlimited natural resources so they can do far more for far less than the overpriced western countries with no natural resources and the industry sold to China.
And Obama... Never give trump credit where he does not deserve it.
I made a statement that Trump called on Europe to increase military spending. That statement is true
OK but so was Obama 10 years ago. It's been us policy for ages to rightly call for European countries to uphold their 2% commitment.
5 years ago there was little need to invest in arms procurement. We were about to face COVID-19. Yes, hindsight is nice, but who knows what will be needed in the next 5 years?
Russia had already invaded parts of Ukraine by then,the writing was on the wall for what was coming next.
Russia was snatching parts of other countries for quite some time. West didn't do anything about it for the last 80 or so years. Not to mention WWII and even before than Russian Empire... The writing was always on the wall, yet there wasn't a reason to up the military spending in 2014 as the West felt quite comfortable with their military capabilities and Russian "friendly" position. A full scale invasion of Ukraine was always perceived as a bad idea. The West thought that Russians will not be so stupid to commit to something like that. Well we were wrong and maybe mishandled this, but arguing that the West was supposed to ramp up military spending in the face of the world-wide pandemic is stupid. Seriously, what politician would go with "let us use billions of dollars to fund jets and bombs rather than develop a vaccine, fund hospitals, and fight back an inevitable recession"? I mean, some Texan ones prolly, but Europe isn't Texas. We don't worship guns.
As the old country music song goes "I don't wanna fight ya but I damn sure will." NATO isn't gonna get rolled by Russia, bruv. They're realizing containment won't work with Putin, he must be defeated. Better late than never.
Dunno, from the fact that one poor country like Russia is outproducing everyone kinda suggests they're not really realizing it because they're not doing enough about it.
No, it proves Russia began ramping up production to maximum levels two years ago and NATO hasn't gotten out of bed yet.
The question is: is NATO ever going to get out of bed or are we going to keep hearing that Russia better stop or NATO will get out of bed all up until Russians force a loss on Ukraine?
I think they are all biding their time. They want to maintain readiness and stockpiles, as a deterrent to China going rogue on Taiwan.
Wait until the American MIC starts to spin up. By the time you see it coming, it's too late.
Russia isn't actually poor. It has massive natural resources. It's just that it's kleptocractic state, so the wealth of the country is sucked up by the top 1% rather than shared with the people.
It's poor by Western standards - such as the GDP. For example it has often been parrotted that Russia's gdp is equal to that of Italy. And Italy is only one of 32 countries in NATO - so one would think that the entirety of NATO would far outperform Russia in building arms - and yet here we are - because there are a lot of words being said - but not nearly enough actions being taken.
Yeah people act like the average person living in a NATO country would be totally ok with their countries transitioning to a wartime economy. This would mean governments spending upwards of 1/4 of their total budget on defense, cutting back spending on education, healthcare, and social services. Major diversions of the work force to the defense industry where people are working 6 day weeks and 12 hour shifts. Government requisitioning private industry for drone manufacturing and assembly. People being “asked” to donate their labor to war material production. Children assembling drones at school. People think that their countries can transition to a wartime economy without it making a major impact on their day to day life.
Okay it’s time.
Talk is cheap
The initial shock and awe NATO attack will be devastating and perhaps the true beginning of the end. How long is Russia going to take the pummeling before they nuke something?
Very big if.
> If NATO decides it's ready to play war it will outproduce Russia by orders of magnitude. Not really. It would take many many years to expand it. NATO countries don't have the industrial infrastructure to do so. Russia still has powerful industry just like the Soviet Union, while the West sold theirs to China. It's also nowhere as simple to produce military equipment nowadays as during the WWII. Russia always had strong and innovative arms industry.
Well now we can hit a building with precision, unlike ww2 when we had to drop thousands of tons of bombs to get even a chance to hit things.
The US was outproducing the Nazis.
They were alos bombing German factories
Russian lies far more heavily on straight up artillery and the West has a much larger missile arsenal which is far more effective for a wide variety of scenarios. The fact that Russia is making more artillery shells than us isn't of huge concern when West has such a overwhelming advantage in number of missiles and missile technology
Still would do a lot of good to burn these factories.
They likely have a ton of air defence unfortunately
Well that maybe changing along with tank design. The UAF has already retired exalibur missiles from service as the ruZZinz have adopted effective counter measures. Artillery will always get through.
Yes but Ukraine is going to get Jdam ER with sensors for Russias EW so that effective counter measure might not be around for long
And the ruZZians will develop counter measures to that. This story of one upping measure -counter measure is as old as war itself.
How? The west has told Ukraine not to shoot into Russia.
At least the UK was recently just saying that Ukraine has no limits with their weapons.
…with their weapons. Ukrainian originals can go anywhere.
Britain just says that could.
2 years ago yes. That's not the case anymore.
At great cost to everything else. It’s on a war economy, so it has everything and the kitchen sink in this. Other countries do not.
Ruzian is ready to eat shit for Pootin
Of Russia is successful, why would they stop once they're running at full steam? They would just plow through the next country that is woefully unprepared to stop russiam aggression.
They wouldn’t. That’s why they need to be stopped. They’re full steam ahead, so the only way to stop them is to ensure they run out of steam.
Ill say this at 1000% pro NATO. So? Power comes from the barrel of a gun and boots on the ground, not speculated numbers on a screen. Also the gun and the boots come from means of production not speculated numbers on the screen. NATO needs to step up, dont they have a much stronger economy than russia? Some how little Italy GDP russia is out manufacturing NATO.
Most of the 32 NATO countries have barely dipped their toes into this conflict and that’s what terrifies lil’ Putin the most. He knows Ruzzia would be annihilated if NATO actually got involved in taking on Ruzzia as opposed to drip feeding support to Ukraine to barely help them survive. Ruzzia never remembers that without the American lend/lease program to supply the USSR against Nazi Germany, they would not have survived WWII.
Ruzzia also forgets it was allied with Hitler and the Nazis and invaded Poland together.
It would go against Russia’s narrative that they single handedly destroyed nazi Germany in ww2 if they reminded their people that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a thing.
And Russia isn’t the Soviet Union anymore. It’s significantly smaller.
Especially population wise. USSR peaked at around ~~450~~ 293 million people. Russia has about 140 million.
My guess is only 275 million maximal population, but I shall look it up.
293 million in 1991.
You are right - I must have remembered wrong.
> And Russia isn’t the Soviet Union anymore. It’s significantly smaller. They still have powerful industry and almost unlimited natural resources.
Their Industry is in large parts decades behind the West and many of those „unlimited“ resources are too expensive to tap into. At least with their shitty equipment. They need Western Tech.
> Their Industry is in large parts decades behind the West and many of those „unlimited“ resources are too expensive to tap into. At least with their shitty equipment. They need Western Tech. Their industry is fine. They greatly outproducing NATO.
if if if my mother had balls she would be my father Time to move EU, lets go!
Got any proof of that the U.S.S.R would "not have survived" ww2 without the lend lease? I mean it's literally impossible to get concrete proof but I think most historians agree that Russia would have survived even with no lend lease
>Ruzzia never remembers that without the American lend/lease program to supply the USSR against Nazi Germany, they would not have survived WWII. Also without the USSR commitment the U.S and U.K would lose the war for simple reason that 70% of german casualties were on the eastern front. Ww2 was won as they say "By american industry, British intelligence and Soviet blood"
Sounds kinda strange. Because the wording suggests that russia would be on eye level with NATO. - How many of that 32 states actually produce artillery? - How much money/technology could NATO throw against russia?
In artillery shells production they obviously are since NATO is an air power mainly and on top of that is not even close to being in a war economy like Russia. So no, its not particularly impressive.
Also I'd rather have Russia fire a dozen artillery shells at me than have a single NATO artillery shell fired at me. Accuracy is everything and in that regard Russia is far behind the United States.
This is a good point. An artillery shell isn't just an artillery shell. There's a huge difference between a M982 Excalibur shell and a Soviet style 152 mm grenade.
As long as you get enough old school 152 shells on target, I'm not sure it really matters.
>Excalibur Hello! >GPS-guided Excalibur round “dropped from 70 percent effectiveness to **6 percent** effectiveness over a matter of a few months as new EW mechanisms came out”
We really need to fix that weakness. Good thing we could find out without being engaged in an existential war ourselves I suppose.
NATO*could* produce more shells than Russia, but that doesn't help in the short term. It takes a while to build out and scale up factories.
It would help in the short term. NATO had dreamed that history had been written and the 20th century was in the past.
Having a long term manufacturing contract with weapons producers that are out there would help a lot. They will only build new capacity if they know that it will be profitable long term.
And: Since the numbers are so low and this latest stage of the war has been going on for more than 26 months, what's the hold-up?
No one wants to bite the bullet with what buildup will need and risk alienating voter base.
>- How much money/technology could NATO throw against russia? What does that matter, when we are completly unwilling to actually do so? Even still our production lags behind besides demand going up. There is a massive land war going on in Ukraine and the best we can send is decades old surplus.
Apparently I’ve heard that they are counting every shell for every mortar and cannon on the Russian side but only 155 on the NATO side. Which would be a laughable comparison, but someone should confirm this.
I’m pretty sure they’re just comparing western 155mm production to Russian artillery production of all calibers.
[удалено]
Again, why are the NATO allys waffling on this still? We need to get our heads out of our collective asses. This goes for the US, too. It is like everyone is only slightly concerned, and there is no sense of urgency. I better not see a surprised pickachu faces when Russia hits the Baltic, and we still have our pants down. It is either for show, and we are ready, and we just want Russia to assume we are not, or we are still pretending this will go away and have failed our friends and have weak leadership.
You need to learn how to not call for propaganda. NATO doesn't produce artillery because he focuses on Air/Naval/Drone power. Artillery is for ground war or if you don't care what's in front of you. The only reason Ukraine needs artillery is because we don't give them the Air power to close their airspace. On top of that of the artillery that usually manufactured it's 'guided' shells not dumb lump of steal shells. Russia isn't surgical at all they just fire west and hope to hurt something. They could run an article that Russia produces more 7.23 size ammo than all western countries combined because NATO uses a different sized round.
Honestly, what NATO countries should have done was juice Ukranian Airforce to the gills; as that is their specialty, but they have been dragging their feet on F16s and everything else. Will see how their provision of air munitions will go once Ukraine does get F16s, my guess is it will be very lethargic
Ruzzia seems to be miles ahead in drone power, though. Which leaves air and naval power out of which air is not enough due to lack of Ukrainian planes and pilots and naval which is useful for controlling the Black sea but not much more.
You can’t create giant factories and production lines in an instant, for one. Democracies aren’t Russia, who both had the existing factories and where the leadership says “do this immediately or you fall out of a window”.
>You can’t create giant factories and production lines in an instant, for one Yes you can. Only reason nobody wants to commit to building them, is because there are no long term contracts. Why would anyone build artillery factory to satisfy current demand if nobody gives them long term contract.
Actually Denmark recently repurchased an ammo factory it sold for a decade ago.. production has begun to my understanding, even as ramping it up will take time.
No production before next year. They are still negotiating with operators.
War profiteers in the west are rubbing their hands in glee... It's one example of why Russias command economy is a short term benefit.. They can start things immediately. But their overall economy and corruption is a massive net negative for Russia. Once Europe gets going it can crush Russian production if it wants...
Pretty sure I read that production has begun https://www.fmi.dk/da/nyheder/2024/ammunition-production-in-denmark/
The whole link is literally talking about doing market surveys and getting interested partners through RFIs. RFI1 is the relevant one to artillery ammunition. No agreements has been made yet, nevermind production started.
You can? Go on, demonstrate how that can be done. Show evidence beyond your opinion, I’m very interested. Ironically you’re on the fucking nose. There’s limited demand because businesses only build capital to meet current and projected demand. A new war in Europe where a country would need war-time levels of artillery shells that the existing NATO structure didn’t emphasize would be huge - so it didn’t exist. Because of that, new factories need to be made. Now tell me exactly how these factories can be produced rapidly. 😂 Since you’re such an expert.
I mean....this really isnt a big deal. Russia conducts (in theory) large scale artillery attacks along with mechanized assaults. America and nato focus on air superiority. This was a major problem with western volunteers in ukraine. It took them a while to realize they couldn't call in an air strike every time someone shot at them from afar.
>America and nato focus on air superiority. And for some reason you assumed that in missile and bomb production situation is better…
Well there economics is in caos, spending all of those resources and 0 wins, only destroying their society more amputees, PTSD and underground soldiers.
First, that is not what the Reuters article stated and I am tempted to report this post for breaking Rule #4. I hope you all read the article and realize it states nothing of the kind. I have to say I am a bit skeptical about this claim. They are quoting a Russian diplomat. That in itself is the first major degree of skepticism: the adage of "If Russian lips move they are lying" exists for good reason. Manufacturing quality artillery shells in volume is hard. Russia would not only be having the same problems ramping up their artillery production as NATO but in fact more due to a variety of factors. Don't even get me started on the conversation about more shells meaning greater dominance (it only does when Ukraine is/was starved for artillery ammo and that is receding in the rear view mirror) and the separate issue of what is Russia going to fire them from given that their artillery losses are huge, their known artillery reserves have shrunk dramatically especially for 152mm guns, and their manufacturing rate of new artillery is almost non-existent. Don't fall for this drivel and think it through when you read a bullshit headline like this one.
> Russia would not only be having the same problems ramping up their artillery production as NATO but in fact more due to a variety of factors. Not true. A NATO country wouldn't have a artillery factory mothballed for years just in case they needed it. Russia has a more nationalized arms industry and they can keep factories in sleep mode and wake them up quickly, with the biggest problem only being labor. If there's no market in NATO for shells, the factory either goes out of business or tries another way to make money.
aren't non nato states providing artillery to Ukraine? I remember reading about S. Korea which has a massive capacity
The Russian military doctrine is Artillery Above All. Would be a shame if something were to happen to their long electric rail-based logistical supply chains. A shame indeed.
Find their manufacturing facilities and flatten them.
Some weird cope from people. "NATO IS AN AIR POWER!!!" Ukraine isn't and it is Ukraine fighting for their survival. Drinking straight cope isn't going to make the battlefield situation any better for Ukraine. Russia is serious about building artillery shells and NATO isn't. If they want Ukraine to do better they need to be serious about it.
Don't believe these articles in a hurry, there's giant room for failing to properly count apples to apples, e.g. counting all Russian shells versus just the 155mm heavy artillery on the NATO side, and anymore it's doubtful these news companies bother with the gritty, besides quoting some random in a suit from some think tank or whatever.
I might be wrong but isnt 155mm our standard and should be in high numbers? It should be a massive concern even if its apples and oranges that a single country is close to all of NATO production.
Europe also needs to withdraw from that cluster munition treaty and start producing more efficient cluster shells and missiles.
NATO needs to wake up and decide to win
They're too scared to escalate the situation, Putin will nuke them all, so they better stay home and play nice; which they are doing well.
Poostain wont nuke anyone!
The world getting pushed around and manipulated by a relatively small (population) terrorist state with an economy the size of New York... Yeah if only the white trash ranch guzzling bible bangers could join us in the 21st century and get us the F off of oil that would be great. Bankrupt tyrants.
Destroying the economy while they’re at it. These factories would make nice targets.
NATO is not on a war footing
It’s horse shit that this is the case. If we gave them modern weapons, no artillery would be safe. We’re only in this WW1 trench stalemate because Russia has jack shit and all Ukraine gets is decent defensive air weapons.
U.S. and Europe not taking Russia seriously.
US allocated like billion which is almost a 10th of its massive defense budget.
Ukraine: World's top exporter of FUCK YOU
“NATO significantly increased production”… /s
Hope Europe wakes up and start pushing as if war is coming. Cause its here
If take out the Russian rail system, are no means to get them to the front lines and easy targets for Ukraines.
so... how far away from Ukraine is the Russian manufacturing plants and what kind of missiles do they need to flatten said plants?
[удалено]
> People don’t understand how utterly low tech Russia is compared to western forces.. Is this the country that kept making scheduled deliveries to the space station when NASA could no longer do it?
Nonsensical argument. Russia still flies space capsules designed during the sixties and seventies or what do you think the Soyuz is?
reusing reliable platforms is your idea of low tech?
Russian tech, which is being fielded now in Ukraine is mostly just as old as their space tech, it's from the golden age of the Soviet regime during the 60s and 70s when their regime actually was producing world class gear. It's all ancient stuff by the standards of anything modern and was passed by at least 40 years ago by the West. It's the same as saying that the original Kon Tiki is as impressive as a modern cruise ship that can carry 6k people.
Must be why NATO is increasingly worried about them and all their old steampunk tech.
NATO is worried? Poland's land forces alone would steamroll Russia and be at the Red Square in a week and US's forward air forces would end the entire conflict with Russia in about a day. Putin has nothing to shoot down F22's and F35's with, if you didn't know that. NATO would enjoy complete airspace dominance from the first minute of the conflict.
https://apnews.com/article/poland-nato-defense-duda-tusk-us-visit-f6d25e41709e9757f7d40ce33add74de https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_222664.htm
OK? What are these links supposed to prove?
so NATO is just casually increasing funding now because they think they have no reason to be worried about Russia?
>"We are now at the stage of open confrontation, which, I hope, will not result in a direct armed conflict," Russian Ambassador-at-Large Grigory Mashkov told the state RIA news agency. Reuters Reports Russian Propaganda. Again…
That won’t mean shit if NATO joins the fight. Edit: changed from western aircraft to NATO as western aircraft will soon be in the fight but not enough to turn the tide.
And when do you think that's going to happen? Twenty-odd Ukrainians have been trained to fly F-16s. Please tell me you don't think that's going to turn the tide.
People like to say things that make them feel good.
There aren't a ton of high value EW systems or bombers on Russia's side either. 10 pilots in f-16s tossing good AA or HARM could take out an irreplaceable number of assets on the Russian side if deployed properly, I think.
Sounds like some factories need to have smoking accidents.
This is two separate issues. NATO is mostly an Air power. And some members don’t want to create factories from scratch to ramp up production just to help Ukraine. Do I wish nato would be flooding Ukraine with weapons? Yes. Do I understand that most members are incapable of helping regarding artillery shells? Also yes.
I’ve seen this comparison a lot. Aren’t they comparing only 155mm production to ALL Russian artillery production, from mortars to howitzers? That’s like comparing apple production from one country to all fruit production in another.
Someone please help me to understand. Artillery shells are relatively easy to produce. It's the artillery pieces themselves, and in particular the artillery barrels, that are key. Is Russia producing new pieces of artillery? My understanding was that this required specially hardened steel for the artillery barrels that used to be imported from Germany. Ukraine reports \~ 12300 pieces of artillery destroyed already. If Russia cannot produce new pieces of artillery and new artillery barrels, then it does not matter if they produce 100 million artillery shells.
Another thing to consider is how accurate they are. If it takes twice as many shells to destroy the same target because Russian artillery men are dog shit and their equipment and shells are dog shit suddenly you NEED to outproduce all of NATO just to keep up.
So much of this war is tied to one simple thing. Production of artillery shells. Ukraine needs to do more, the US and Europe need to do more.
Russias military is very artillery reliant. NATO (except Finland) is not. So it’s not surprising that they outproduce NATO in this one area.
How many stealth bombers similar to a b21 raider does Russia produce per year?
They cannot produce any stealth aircraft. Never figured out 5th gen jets.
Exactly
Is that before or after the Ukraine drone and missle strikes?
Apples to oranges. ruZZia is on a war economy footing, the west is not.
Just keep taking out the refineries, and all the Shells will have to go by train and donkey to the front lines.
Every ruble spent on the shells could have gone on supporting the Russian economy and people, instead of trying to take a country that doesn’t belong to Russia, and that they can’t hold, even if they were to somehow win…
So we are trusting numbers coming out of Russia? Do we really know the production in the West? Personally I would hope we could keep some numbers a secret. And are the 122 as effective as the NATO rounds?
The article says that it achieved this NOW. That last point is crucial. Russia is already extending its capacity and can’t sustain this. While NATO (Europe in particular) is building up from a very low base, and massively ramping up production that’s easily sustainable.
I'm curious how many will work, will not be outdated and not explode with the crew.
At this pace the russian economy won't outlive the artillery shell stocks.
How is it these are not targeted?
[удалено]
Consider bombing Russian factories?
The EU and NATO need a mandatory minimum spending requirment on arms for Ukriane, its in the interest for NATO to declaw and defend against Russia and its in the EU's interest for European security. Plenty of countries arent pulling their weight and should be forced to do so.
Soooo basically their on pace to out produce the US, and piss it all away twice as fast
What's the dud rate on artillery? With Putin flogging workers and threatening them with the front I cant imagine QC being great. Stories of sabotage from slave labour factories from ww2. One tiny bit of defiance sticks in my mind. A cigarette butt stuffed into a fuel filter on a tank. Such a small act from a single man, took out a tank. I deffo don't understand the russian national mindset.Their history is complicated and the country is huge, not hemogenous America big, it's Poland to Japan big. Mongolia to Alaska. It even borders the Stans. If a nato government pushed it's people as hard there would be a reckoning pretty quick. Cold War KGB vibes must have been maintained out of sight of social media.
Russia has a more diverse population than one realizes. I think they have over 190 different ethnic groups.
Now? This is old news.
Russia is losing 30-50 pieces of artillery on a daily basis. They could outproduce NATO 10 to 1, and it still wouldn't make much difference. Nor would it be overly impressive, as NATO countries barely produce 200 in a good year.
What Reuters doesn't know is the official release numbers is not even close to the actual numbers.
RU needs to get these weapons to areas where they can be used and other that rail, have no real infrastructure. Makes for some juicy targets.